Ross Coulthart Reveals More on Non-Human Spacecraft, Alien Bodies and Disclosure

Secret large Alien Craft

Secret large Alien Craft

One of the things that I've learned to respect, Joel, is there are some things in this UAP field that are being kept very secret for a good reason. The source who told me about the large craft that allegedly is being stored inside a building in a foreign country outside of the United States assured me that it was safe for me to reveal that such an object exists, but it would be extremely dangerous and compromise worthy U.S. National security imperatives were I to reveal the location. I'm not a UAP activist. I really don't give a # one way or the other what people think, frankly, uh, if they're upset, you know, I'm sorry to upset you, but, um, not to be disrespectful, but the simple fact is that I'm under an enormous ethical obligation to my sources.

Some people on various sites are stating that the below coordinates in South Korea are the location of the building built around the craft.

Google Maps

Street View shows it from the side

a reply to: Enzo954

A large UFO being hidden in a building in the middle of an area bounded by, among other things, a Buddhist temple. A middle school, a chicken restaurant, and what appears to be a well-traveled road?

I don't see the logic of "bringing" such a highly secret vehicle to the end of the road in a location like that, and then erecting a building around it.

Did it land there? If so, someone must have seen it do so.


Or was it dug up there, after years (centuries? Millennia?), and the discovery kept secret until the construction was arranged?

a reply to: Enzo954

Coulthart is full of #e. He has never once revealed a single "source". He was, however, a media shill for a very long time who never had anything to do with the topic of UFology.

Coulthart has made dubious and unverified claims ever since he fist came into the UFology scene in 2018. I find this guy to be a joke in general.

a reply to: Enzo954

Upon what rationale would its placement be uniquely designated to that particular location?

originally posted by: RickestRick
a reply to: Enzo954

Coulthart is full of #e. He has never once revealed a single "source". He was, however, a media shill for a very long time who never had anything to do with the topic of UFology.

Coulthart has made dubious and unverified claims ever since he fist came into the UFology scene in 2018. I find this guy to be a joke in general.

It's essential to appreciate the fundamental tenets of journalistic ethics when examining Mr. Coulthart's position within the field of Ufology. As a professional journalist, it is indeed his duty to protect the anonymity of his sources.

This practice is not exclusive to him but is a cornerstone of journalism globally, designed to maintain the integrity of the reporting process and ensure that sources can provide information without fear of retribution.

Mr. Coulthart has emphasized that he is not positioning himself as the definitive face or authority in the field of Ufology. His mission, is an objective pursuit of the truth, no matter how controversial or unorthodox it may seem.

a reply to: andre18


Lol 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂🤣😂

If he discloses where the ufo is there will be no need for protection of sources anymore

originally posted by: IMSAM
a reply to: andre18


Lol 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂🤣😂

If he discloses where the ufo is there will be no need for protection of sources anymore

The assertion that disclosing the location of a UFO would negate the need for source protection overlooks several crucial aspects of journalistic ethics and practice.

First, the protection of sources is not simply about maintaining the secrecy of specific information, such as the location of an event. It is a broader commitment to ensuring the confidentiality and safety of those who provide information. This practice encourages more individuals to come forward with sensitive or controversial information, as they know their identities will be safeguarded.

Second, revealing the location of a UFO does not necessarily exhaust all the information a source might have provided. The source may hold additional details about the event, its context, the entities involved, or related occurrences. These details would still merit protection even if the location were disclosed.

Lastly, disclosing a UFO's location might introduce additional risks or complications. If the location is sensitive (e.g., a military base or private property), revealing it might violate laws or national security protocols. Moreover, it could trigger a rush of curiosity-seekers or opportunists to the site, potentially leading to damage, contamination, or other unforeseen consequences.

While disclosing a UFO's location might appear to simplify matters, it does not obviate the need for source protection and could indeed introduce new complexities and ethical dilemmas. As a journalist, Mr. Coulthart's responsibility is to navigate these challenges while upholding the integrity of his profession and the trust of his sources.

a reply to: andre18

God dayum son, you are the comaneci of mental gymnastics. Perfect 10.


The truth is coolfart is a snake oil seller. Theres no secret sources no ufo no nothing. He simply must make money to put them groceries on the table. Simply put as luis dehoaxeira elizondovits would say 🤣

originally posted by: IMSAM
a reply to: andre18

God dayum son, you are the comaneci of mental gymnastics. Perfect 10.


The truth is coolfart is a snake oil seller. Theres no secret sources no ufo no nothing. He simply must make money to put them groceries on the table. Simply put as luis dehoaxeira elizondovits would say 🤣

You've made a rather assertive assumption without necessarily being open to alternative possibilities. From the outset, it appears that your belief is built around the absence of evidence rather than engaging with the evidence that has been presented.

You're stating categorically that there are "no secret sources," but it's important to bear in mind that the lack of our personal knowledge or access to such information does not negate its possible existence. We aren't always privy to every aspect of the truth, so holding a fixed belief in the non-existence of these sources can limit your understanding and close off possibilities.

Just within the past month, there has been a considerable amount of testimonial evidence presented to Congress from whistleblowers supporting the claims made by David Grusch. This is not merely speculation but data shared by individuals with firsthand experience or knowledge. Are we to dismiss their accounts outright?

Rubio: Recent UFO whistleblower isn't the only one


Moreover, Mr. Coulthart is not some obscure character seeking fame or financial gain. He is a man of distinguished reputation, who has made significant contributions to his field over the years. Ruining such a reputation for a fleeting moment of profit doesn't align with his career trajectory and ethos. To insinuate that he would jeopardize his professional standing for short-term gain is a rather drastic assumption, one that doesn't take into account the complexities of his situation.

a reply to: IMSAM

So were talking about tarps? The ongoing push of ignorant bliss by those who should know better on a conspiracy site who are so mentally corrupted by their standing belief that any and all that is said by government is a conspiracy.

LMAF? You need to get a grip baby. This isn't a ploy or a CIA false flag as we are at the point of technological advancement that they have to disclose that yes, they are here as in ET.

A fooking tarp.

a reply to: Waterglass

You sound upset, i dare say mad too. You mad son?
Does me saying coolfart is a conman trigger you? Deal with it because he is a grifter




a reply to: andre18

Dont think so tim. Coolfart has no sources but we agree on the lack of journalistic integrity, coolfart is a distinguished snake oil seller who can rival top names in the industry as knapp &doorbell, as for his "sources" lets get a taste from some time ago

www.abc.net.au...


Lol

a reply to: andre18

He is a man of distinguished reputation, who has made significant contributions to his field over the years. 

Hmmmm.

Giving Credit where credit is due……

Who get’s the credit for bringing Grusch onto the UAP scene publicly?

In watching and reading bits and pieces….it seems to me that the following wants to, or takes the credit for Grusch….

Greer
Corbell
Knapp
Kean
Blumenthal
Coulthart

At one point or another, they’ve all mentioned, words to the effect, of working with Grusch for some time before, him going public…..imo.

Who’s the actual person(s) behind UFOlogies newest media darling?

👽

The entire matter can take a historic turn by just showing us one: living, machine or even parts.
Without that it is the endless diatribe.

a reply to: andre18

He peddles fantasy. He's never once revealed any single "source". Therefore he can, in perpetuity, make up anything he wants under the his guise of "journalism".

In a field of study where verifiable sources are crucial to the advancement of the topic this guy produces absolutely nothing except hearsay. You might as well read a science fiction novel.

a reply to: RickestRick

Its important you understand the complexity of the journalistic landscape and the necessity for some level of source protection, especially when dealing with sensitive topics such as national security and unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs).

The field of investigative journalism indeed hinges on the presence of verifiable sources, but you must also recognize that it is occasionally guided by anonymity, particularly when sources are at risk. A need for anonymity can arise from the risk of professional repercussions, legal consequences, or personal threats that the source might face if their identity is disclosed. This is particularly true for topics that touch on matters of national security or involve confidential information from within institutions like the military or intelligence community.

Moreover, journalism is a process. Often, initial claims are made based on evidence that isn't yet publicly verifiable. Investigative reporters like Coulthart, however, are committed to dig deeper, to continue questioning, researching, and accumulating evidence until a full and concrete picture can be presented. The absence of comprehensive proof at this stage does not invalidate the investigative process; instead, it underscores the ongoing nature of investigative journalism.

Coulthart's body of work demonstrates his commitment to rigorous journalistic principles. He offers hypotheses, actively seeks to validate them, and presents his findings in a measured and thoughtful way. While he admittedly doesn't reveal all of his sources, the inclusion of key details such as official reports, direct quotes from figures in the field, and references to high-ranking officials suggest that his work is not pure "fantasy" but rather founded on professional discourse and in-depth investigation.

Moreover, he challenges the official responses to UAP encounters and calls for greater transparency from the authorities. His emphasis on the importance of public knowledge and debate highlights his dedication to journalistic ethics, which include serving the public interest.

Lastly, the science-fiction comparison is not entirely apt. While some elements may seem fantastical due to the highly unusual subject matter, this doesn't necessarily disqualify them as fabrications. Unconventional phenomena call for unconventional explanations, which are often met with skepticism until supported by further evidence. It is the job of journalists like Coulthart to investigate these topics and push for truth and clarity, a pursuit that often begins with more questions than answers.

While it is healthy to approach extraordinary claims with skepticism, dismissing all of Coulthart's work as mere fantasy based on his necessary protection of sources doesn't sufficiently account for the complexities and requirements of investigative journalism or the unique challenges posed by his field of inquiry.

a reply to: andre18

Surely, if Ross has already revealed there is a " large craft that allegedly is being stored inside a building in a foreign country outside of the United States", he has compromised his source.

Unless there are a number of large craft in locations outside the US and a large number of people who know about them, then it wouldn't be hard to work out who might be blabbing.

Also interesting how such 'secrets' are being revealed to a foreign national. Yet also from a member of the 5 Eyes alliance.

a reply to: mirageman

Yo mate, could be nothing but heard that Grusch was hanging around with Corbell and Knapp over a year ago.

a reply to: karl 12

Yep and Grusch was a colleague of BF Lue



And worked for Eric Davis. Never known to miss the chance to tell a tall story.



The usual suspects are all lining up

a reply to: mirageman

Ha nice work - apparently he was a lot fatter back then but has since been given a 'makeover'.

At this point it looks like they're just throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks (Elizondo, Ramirez, Nolan, Grusch etc.)

Also looks like they're heavily relying on the upcoming younger generation to unquestionably buy into all this.. some of which simply don't care about the historical aspect or have disturbingly (engineered) short attention spans.

Once the Grusch op falls flat on its arse wonder who the next one will be?

They've definitely been narrative prepping with Talbot project Loeb although now looks like many folks aren't taking him too seriously either.